President Obama Diplomat In Chief
We, Us, Everyone, United, Together, Collectively, Act as One, You and I; these are terms that embody the very spirit of diplomacy and the types of words oft' spoken by President Obama. Some Commanders-in-Chiefs come in with a doctrinaire, caviler, and arrogant view of foreign policy before they even step foot in the Oval Office. Others come with hardly any view on foreign policy whatsoever. However every once in a while a man has stepped forward to claim the Presidency that seeks to create transformative and lasting change in the world. President Obama is the latter. He views the world with a refreshing, optimistic but realistic, idealism rarely seen in most politicians. Most who see the world in such a way are the artist, poets, writers, activist, and the young people of the Nation. He does indeed embody attributes of such idealist and people seeking to change how people view and respond to the world. Some fault these idealist as dreamers but it is these very dreamers that have always been the ones along with the military that have been the ones to change the world. There are indeed two ways to change the world one with changing the hearts and minds as in diplomacy and the other with the edge of the sword. President Obama I believe realizes this great truth.
Some may fault him, including myself at times, for being too much of an idealist and too unwilling to get involved more aggressively fighting tyrants like Bashar al-Assad. To allow such tyrants to stand that have slaughtered so much of humanity is among the weaknesses of idealism. However as a whole it is this idealism that will transform and help heal the world. The past of using fear and force to force others to submit to ones will is slowly coming to an end in American foreign policy as being the way to solve problems. This is not to say that fear and force never will play a role, just not the prominent role and just not until all peaceful options have been exhausted. Tyrants of course will continue to use fear and force to force people to accept their will, so we must be ever mindful of that. We may be evolving with our Nation's foreign policy but many other nations are stuck in the same age old battles that never can nor will be won until they realize fear and force is not a very practical, humane, and prudent way to create the change you wish to see. You can force people with the barrel of a gun, deprive them into desperation as in sanctions, make them fear you so they will submit, or you can work on winning their hearts and minds. Winning the hearts and minds of others can be indeed among the most difficult things in the world, but it can be the very thing that creates the most positive transformative change. It is on winning the hearts and minds of others that our future will depend on. President Obama I believe realizes this great truth as he has displayed his desire to try to achieve that very thing. One must understand this and other important truths to actually achieve such as winning the hearts and minds.
There is two ways you can deal with an irrational and violent man one way is with irrationality and violence. The other is with using your rational mind to get into his mind and knowing what makes him tick to use that information to your advantage to know how to temper his irrationality, along with a show of strength and defense to prevent that man from harming others. Should you fail to persuade him however and he begins to use violence and ceases to stop the only way to stop him is through violence as though violence may normally be irrational it is rational in such cases. To win a persons heart and mind is so much more preferable in so many ways then the tactic of fear and force. It is on winning the hearts and minds that will create the most lasting, stable, humane, and most peaceful world we can achieve as flawed individuals. Winning the hearts and minds requires the patience of Job, the determination of a zealot, the strength of Hercules, the softness of heart of a compassionate mother, the willingness of self sacrifice of a Saint, the wisdom of Socrates, and lastly the realization of the human condition. How can any man or woman ever achieve such a high bar you may ask? The answer is they can't, but they can try to achieve all that is possible for them in their situation. No office in the secular world is more powerful then that of the United States Presidency. Therefore no office is it more possible to have the best chance to win the hearts and minds. President Obama has taken this monumental challenge and as of recently has been showing his monumental strength as Diplomat in Chief.
President Obama's trip to the Middle East was an example of a man who it would appear destiny has placed him in this position, at this time, for this purpose, to transition into a new and exciting world of possibilities. Few men could have the temperament and wisdom to accomplish this great success albeit seemingly small from outward appearances. I believe his recent trip to the Middle East was among the most successful of any President on diplomacy in that region of the world. He strengthened our alliances while at the same time offering future possibilities of new alliances with former enemies. Few things are greater in the human spirit then turning former enemies into friends. That of course is a future possibility not what was achieved on this trip. This possibility will require many more such trips and parting from the foreign policy of the past. Our allies Israel and Turkey now on speaking terms was no small accomplishment, especially since the war in Syria will require both Countries cooperation in order to help with humanitarian and possible future military actions. He also more looking towards the future created the very first bricks of the foundation of a two state solution in Israel and Palestine. He was very successful of winning many young Israeli hearts and minds now to win over young Palestinian hearts and minds and you have the future of a more peaceful Israel and Palestine. With the foundation that was laid down on this recent trip I believe we will look back and say what was achieved would not have been achievable if this was not done. It was a shining moment in President Obama's diplomatic strength and optimism.
Now the future is being slowly placed in the hands of the young people of that region. The older generation is fading away and the brightness of the younger generation is beginning to shine fourth. The younger generation steps forward and walks into the unknown of what for certain the future will bring. If anyone can change that region of the world for the better and every place around the world for that matter, it is the young people. That is if they are willing to do what it takes and have the skills that will be required to accomplish such a monumental task of changing the world. The old for the most part have become set in the ways of the past, hold onto long ago grudges, and don't have the stamina and perseverance that they had in their youth to be as effective as they once were in winning the hearts and minds. This is not to say the old and middle aged will not play a very important and pivotal role, they surely will. Their wisdom, experience, knowledge, compassion, and carefully crafted skills that they have acquired through the decades will be essential for the younger generation to be taught. Without the generation before there would be no past, without the generation of today there would be no present, without the generations to come there will be no future. We will all play a part even if only a very small one of changing the world, the question is will we change it for the better or worse. Time will only tell.
A.C.M.
Hi All Glad To Be Back!
Please Share Your Thoughts.
And hopefully they will abandon the dogmas of the past.
Yes let us hope it is the only way forward for peace.
Interesting, well written article.
I toosometimesgetfrustratedwithObama'sappearanceofindecision,but he is a more cautious and patient man than I, as he is able to ignore public pressure, and carefully evaluate the consequences of his actions.
Syria is a particularly complicated and frustrating problem. Assad and hisunconscionablybrutal methods are indeed difficult to ignore. We are forced watch in horror as the men, women, children and babies of Syria are slaughtered and left suffering, but when weintervenedin Iraq well over 100,000 Iraqis died as a result.
Syria has a different set of problems than most of the other middle east nations that went or is going through their "Arab Springs". Actually, each country have auniqueset of problems, but the Syrian problem is that there is too much al Quada influence among the rebels, and we have no idea, at this point, who the real leaders will be when the smoke clears, and in what or whose hands the WMDs, that we know are in thecountry, will fall.
Great contribution Alan, thank you.
That is the only way there will be peace.
Extremists on both sides must realize that the only way forward is compromise-- each must realize they will have to accept some of the other side's demands, as well as compromise on some of their own.
And, as President Obama has rightfully pointed out on this trip, the starting point must be acceptance of the two state solution by both parties. The Jews must accept the fact that the Arab aspiration towards an independent Palestinian state is legitimate-- and similarly, the Palestinians must accept that the Jews' are entitled to their own state as well.
That is the key. Without this agreement on the part of both the Israelis and the Palestinians, all the other issue can never be solved.
Assad's rule is one of widespread horrific barbarism, that for sure. But what you say is true. Indeed, there's a strong probability that what replaces him may be equally as bad.
And add to that all of Saddam's fellow Iraqis he murdered -- many tortured to death in the most horrendous ways.
And his use of WMDs to massacre Kurdish (and Iranian) civilians.
Plus those killed, both Iraqis and non-Iraqis, in the two wars he started. (well over 800,000 in only those wars alone-- I have no idea how many Iraqis and Kurds he murdered at home).
Was it worth it going to war against Saddam? While we did remove a brutal dictator (who was also a threat to Kurds and other minority groups in Iraq, as well as his neighbours), on the balance I wonder if it was worth it.
While of course there were many differences, there are some similarities. For one: is it ever justified to overthrow a dictator (or to arm those opposing him?). And if so, what are the criteria that should be used in deciding?
The main difference between Iraq and Syria is there is an active genocide in Syria, active threat of chemical weapons in Syria being used against the Syrian people and surrounding Nations including against Israel and Turkey, and an active widespread humanitarian crises in Syria and throughout the region. In Iraq there was none of those things. I am not speaking of a full fledged 100,000 boots on the ground war but arming the rebels and coordinated attacks of strategic Assad regime interest. The quicker Assad and his regime falls the quicker the Syrian people have a chance to live.
As far as the extremist we greatly contributed to that phenomenon here in the West by not getting more directly involved and not getting involved at all until late in the uprising. If we would have done what I and a few others advocated for many months ago there might be Tens of Thousands more people alive today and Bashar al-Assad and his regime would have been placed in the ash heap of history. The best thing to do is take all our intelligence that we have developed over many months and use it to our advantage to know which rebel groups we should directly help with arms and coordinated attacks and which ones we should steer clear of. We should also use bribes to convince the rebels to leave the extremist and join the non-extremist groups instead. Most of those guys are not hardcore extremist just younger men wanting to fight against Assad and joining groups that offer them as they see the best chance of overthrowing Assad. Many of them would leave in a heartbeat if they were offered a better alternative. They join extremist in desperation, help end that desperation and help end the flock towards extremist.
How we got bogged down in Iraq is Nation Building, Unilateralism, Mission Creep, Poor Strategic Planning and Execution of That Strategy, and not working as hard as we did as in Afghanistan of Winning The Hearts and Minds of the civilian population. Hopefully we learned from our mistakes and will not repeat them, because if we do The United States is finished in the world.
But in Iraq there was an active genocide as well. (Against the Kurds. Also against the Marsh Arabs.) Not sure what point you are trying to make here...?
Well, OK-- that is different. In Syria today there is only the threat of chemical weapons being used against the Syrian people and against surrounding nations. But the situation in Iraq was different, because beyond a hypothetical threat as in Syria-- in Iraq chemical weapons were actually being used!!!
Against not only Iraqis but also against his neighbours. And, initially, there was a real fear that he would use them against coalition forces as well.
I think your forgetting chemical weapons and genocide were what Saddam did in the past not in the present when we invaded. It was too late to stop chemical attacks and the genocide because it had already happened. Saddam was a thug yes but not an active threat to justify a full invasion as we did.
Sorry if I was unclear. I wasn't trying to use those facts to justify the war on Iraq. (In fact, IMO, it was a terrible mistake-- as horrible as it was,we should not have done it!).
Rather, I just wanted to point out that Saddam not only had chemical weapons,but actually used them-- against civilian Kurdish populations and also against Iranians!
He was also apparently developing nukes (although the Israelis, bless 'em, put a stop to that). And he had engaged in genocide. Also-- he started two wars! (He invaded Kuwait with the intention of conquering and annexing it, and he started a long and horrific war with Iran).
Yes, it became apparent (unfortunately too late) that he no longer had WMDs. But he had a lot of people fooled-- here are some interesting quotes from some politicians at the time (Be aware that this is a video from the Republican Party. But the quotes are real).
Shocking stuff...who knew?
Yes both parties got the wool pulled over their eyes by the intelligence services here and abroad.
I wonder if we've been any more sucessful at "winning the hearts and minds" of the peole in Afghanistan than we were in Iraq?
It seems hardly a week goes by without another attack by supposedly "friendly" Afghanis on American soldiers.
And, of course, not only does Afghanistan not have nuclear weapons, but the terrorists who attacked us on 911 were Arabs, not Afghanis.